# What Would Jesus Drive: The SUV debate **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 16, 2003, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-jesus-drive-the-suv-debate/182212 "2003-06-16T13:49:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 10
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2003, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-jesus-drive-the-suv-debate/182212/181 "2003-06-21T20:15:00Z")
So, where are the popular protests against old cars? - Older cars have horrible emissions. I can’t count the number of times I’ve seen some ‘save the earth’ type drive by me in a 1974 Volvo blowing clouds of blue smoke out the back. Even in proper tune, they emit orders of magnitude more crap into the air than new cars. - Older cars are nowhere NEAR as safe as new ones. Not even compared to new SUVs. If you put a typical 70’s era car through modern crash tests, it would come out on the bottom of the list. By about a mile. - Older cars get terrible fuel economy. They’re typically out of tune, worn, and use ancient technology. - Older cars often have huge doors, and their condition means the owner probably doesn’t care about scratches. In my experience they are responsible for a significant amount of the door dings I get in parking lots. I avoid parking beside these old boats. - Some of these older cars are behemoths that make even the larger cars of today look puny. And yet, I see no popular backlash against people who drive older cars. Why not pass laws mandating that old cars must meet modern emissions and safety standards, or be destroyed? When you think about it from this perspective, a possible answer jumps out at you: Older cars and driven by poor people. SUV’s are typically driven by people with more money. This would also explain why the same people who hate SUVs don’t seem to mind minivans. They associate minivans with middle class families with children, and therefore cut them plenty of slack. If Minivans cost $50,000 and were trendy among the jet-setters, then I think you’d see the same complaints about minivans as you do about SUVs. In short, the SUV complaint is just class warfare in a new dress. Now, as for the ‘need’ argument. I’m hesitant to go down this road, because I hate even partially conceding the notion that in a free country people have to prove that they ‘need’ what they buy. If that were the gold standard to judge people by, we’d all be living in 500 sq ft apartments and would ride the bus. Those that had cars would have Toyota Echos. If you don’t fit into the category of living only by your ‘needs’, then may I respectfully suggest that you shut your gaping pie-hole when you don’t agree with other people’s choices? That said… I have a small SUV (Ford Escape). I actually didn’t want to buy an SUV. I wanted a sporty car. I don’t particularly like SUVs. However, I added up these needs: 1. Drive my child around, along with all the stuff she needs for long trips. 2. Luggage capacity for family for 2 week vacations. 3. A rack to tie down skis in the winter and bikes in the summer. 4. The ability to carry around computer equipment, including bulky gear like 19" monitors. 5. In the spring, I have to carry plants for my wife’s flowers. 6. I own a house. So having a utility vehicle is a must, even if I don’t have a fixed, regular need for transporting large items. But sometimes stuff happens. You buy a new TV. Or a toilet has to be replaced. Or you pick up some new patio chairs. The lawnmower breaks and has to go in for service. Whatever. I’d say at least half a dozen times a year I have to haul something that won’t fit in a car. Notice I haven’t mentioned any of the ‘traditional’ uses for an SUV (rough terrain, 4WD). Those are also a benefit for me, but I didn’t list them because just the six items above CLEARLY pushed me into the ‘SUV’ market. Perhaps a station wagon could do it, but not as comfortably, and I just don’t like most wagons. And the ones that I like were about $10,000 more than my Escape. Most people who drive SUVs have valid reasons, just like mine. Perhaps you’re an amateur astronomer, or a painter, or a soccer coach. You have to lug a lot of junk around. Perhaps you like to ski in the winter, and AWD makes a winter trip into the mountains much safer. The typical sneering liberal attitude is that, taken as a group people are stupid and need to be controlled, protected, and forced to do things for their own good. But in reality, it’s the other way around. As individuals, we make stupid choices on occasion. But when looked at in the aggregate, people usually tend to make rational choices. The whole field of economics depends on that assumption, for example. YOU may not like their tradeoffs, but that doesn’t mean they don’t have good reason for making them. In fact, it’s usually the lawmakers that make stupid choices. Especially the do-gooders who pass laws based on emotion. Like mandating airbags without any thought to what effect that will have on auto sales, which by definition means that older, more dangerous cars stay on the road longer. SUVs themselves are partially a response to the increase in CAFE standards for cars that were pushed through in the 1970’s and 1980’s. The law of unintended consequences coming to bite the regulators in the ass. ---
**Author:** ![lucwarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e19adc/32.png) [@lucwarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lucwarm)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2003, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-jesus-drive-the-suv-debate/182212/182 "2003-06-21T20:51:58Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by enipla \* > \*\*Good for you! Carry that biased flag tall and proud! \*\* I’m not sure that “biased” is quite the right word, but basically yeah - I’m biased against anyone who inconveniences me and endangers me to satisfy their own vanity. ---
**Author:** ![lucwarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e19adc/32.png) [@lucwarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lucwarm)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2003, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-jesus-drive-the-suv-debate/182212/183 "2003-06-21T21:29:11Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Sam Stone \* > \*\* > Older cars and driven by poor people. > SUV’s are typically driven by people with more money. > \*\* For what it’s worth, I don’t find old cars anywhere near as annoying as SUV’s. For one thing, old cars don’t block my view. (I will concede however, that old cars pose a greater threat to me than modern cars.) And yes, money has something to do with it. See, the reasons people do things are important. To borrow an analogy from an earlier thread, let’s suppose you are walking down some stairs, but have to go very slowly because the person in front of you is walking down slowly. Are you more annoyed if (1) the person in front of you is walking slowly because he is on crutches; (2) the person in front of you is walking slowly because he’s on a cell phone? If someone drives an old car because he or she is poor, it’s far less annoying than someone who drives an SUV to satisfy his or her own vanity. Just MHO of course. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2003, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-jesus-drive-the-suv-debate/182212/184 "2003-06-22T01:04:31Z")
And what, exactly, is your evidence that SUVs are driven because of ‘vanity’? Or is this just a useful motivation because it sounds so unreasonable? Personally, I think people who don’t buy SUVs want a vehicle with a trunk so they can hide the bodies of the people they kill. The bastards. All you murdering car owners make me sick. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2003, 2:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-jesus-drive-the-suv-debate/182212/185 "2003-06-22T02:16:42Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by lucwarm \* > \*\*If someone drives an old car because he or she is poor, it’s far less annoying than someone who drives an SUV to satisfy his or her own vanity. Just MHO of course. \*\* My husband drives a '73 Mustang convertible. Poor or vanity? You be the judge! Julie ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2003, 8:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-jesus-drive-the-suv-debate/182212/186 "2003-06-22T08:07:01Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by fessie \* > Fascinating thread - I’ll admit to being a skimmer, so I might have missed this, but where’s the posts about the morality of using up a limited resource more rapidly than necessary? I’m not thinking of people who use SUVs to help run a farm or something - I’m thinking of the huge number of SUV drivers in Chicagoland, where there is no off-road and they do an excellent job of plowing the highways in winter. Believe me, we _did_ make the point. I’m with you 100% on that, but good luck convincing any SUV owners in this thread. They seem to think that because _they_, as country dwellers need one, that the millions who own them in the cities must _all_ need them too. Even the auto makers themselves know that they’re pulling the wool over people’s eyes, and I posted the quotes to prove it. > [@](#): > > **blowero** I’m glad to see you using your powers for good 😉 Ha, ha. See, toldya I wasn’t evil.😉 Nice to see you. ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2003, 8:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-jesus-drive-the-suv-debate/182212/187 "2003-06-22T08:11:51Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by enipla \* > 😕 So, people shouldn’t want large cars either. That wasn’t my point at all. My point was that you reversed cause and effect. I hate to do this, but I’ve explained my position so many times that I’m not going to do it again. You’re just going to have to go back and read what I wrote. ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2003, 8:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-jesus-drive-the-suv-debate/182212/188 "2003-06-22T08:24:13Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Sam Stone \* > SUVs themselves are partially a response to the increase in CAFE standards for cars that were pushed through in the 1970’s and 1980’s. The law of unintended consequences coming to bite the regulators in the ass. That’s an interesting way of putting it. I guess in a way you could say that SUVs are not a _response_ to fuel economy standards, but a more accurate depiction is that they are a tricky way of _circumventing_ fuel economy standards. And it’s not exactly an unavoidable consequence of regulation; it’s more like a blatant wielding of the lobbying power of the auto industry. We didn’t _have_ to let SUVs get away with lax regulations, but we did. So are you against regulations altogether? Should we go back to what we had in the 50’s - cars that get 15 mph and belch smog into the air? Do you have any idea how unlivable the planet would be without any kind of regulations? ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2003, 8:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-jesus-drive-the-suv-debate/182212/189 "2003-06-22T08:25:23Z")
Whoops, that should be “I guess you could say that SUV’s are a reponse to fuel economy standards.” ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2003, 8:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-jesus-drive-the-suv-debate/182212/190 "2003-06-22T08:27:40Z")
Ugh, and that’s 15 mp **g**. I think I need to go to bed. ---
**Author:** ![lucwarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e19adc/32.png) [@lucwarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lucwarm)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2003, 12:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-jesus-drive-the-suv-debate/182212/191 "2003-06-22T12:21:08Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Sam Stone \* > **And what, exactly, is your evidence that SUVs are driven because of ‘vanity’?** (1) The fact that most SUV owners do not use SUV’s for off-roading, towing, etc.; and (2) The fact that SUV’s are very trendy. ---
**Author:** ![lucwarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e19adc/32.png) [@lucwarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lucwarm)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2003, 12:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-jesus-drive-the-suv-debate/182212/192 "2003-06-22T12:27:24Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by jsgoddess \* > \*\*My husband drives a '73 Mustang convertible. > > Poor or vanity? You be the judge! > > Julie \*\* For what it’s worth, I’m certainly not trying to argue that older cars are driven solely because of poverty. Earlier, **Sam Stone** said the following: \*\* > [@](#): > > Older cars and driven by poor people.\*\* My comment was in response to this. I’m also not trying to argue that poverty and vanity are the only two possible motivating factors in choice of car. ---
**Author:** ![lucwarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e19adc/32.png) [@lucwarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lucwarm)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2003, 12:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-jesus-drive-the-suv-debate/182212/193 "2003-06-22T12:34:50Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Sam Stone \* > \*\*the six items above CLEARLY pushed me into the ‘SUV’ market. \*\* Why not a minivan? ---
**Author:** ![enipla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/54ee81/32.png) [@enipla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/enipla)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2003, 1:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-jesus-drive-the-suv-debate/182212/194 "2003-06-22T13:38:32Z")
> [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Originally posted by enipla > > The problem is that there are maybe one or two large cars to choose from. This is one of the reasons people are buying SUVs. > [@](#): > > That’s like saying acne causes puberty. blowero’s response - That wasn’t my point at all. My point was that you reversed cause and effect. I hate to do this, but I’ve explained my position so many times that I’m not going to do it again. You’re just going to have to go back and read what I wrote. My original statement was countering the argument that all of a sudden people need big cars. We have wanted/needed big cars for a long time. They do not manufacture big old station wagons any more. lucwarm - I would like to apologize about my snippy comment about your ‘bias flag’. It was not up to the standards expected in GD. Nor the standards I like to set for myself. ---
**Author:** ![fessie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c37758/32.png) [@fessie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fessie)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2003, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-jesus-drive-the-suv-debate/182212/195 "2003-06-22T13:49:24Z")
BTW, re: older cars - I’ve seen news stories about some cities who are buying those older cars from people (at a reasonable price), just to get them & their incredible pollution off the road. So that issue is on the radar, at least in some places (can’t recall where at the moment). ---
**Author:** ![enipla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/54ee81/32.png) [@enipla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/enipla)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2003, 2:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-jesus-drive-the-suv-debate/182212/196 "2003-06-22T14:33:51Z")
> [@](#): > > Why not a minivan? I know this wasn’t addressed to me, but… ummm. Why do you care? I don’t think there is enough difference between a minivan and a MID sized SUV for people to get their ire up. Since MID sized SUVs dominate the SUV market I think the ‘get a minivan argument’ suggests that people that use that argument are biased. I don’t have a cite, but the numbers I remember from other debates is that the huge SUVs account for something like 5% of SUV sales. It just doesn’t seem like it’s worth getting into a froth over. ---
**Author:** ![enipla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/54ee81/32.png) [@enipla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/enipla)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2003, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-jesus-drive-the-suv-debate/182212/197 "2003-06-22T14:49:03Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Sam Stone \* > \*\*Personally, I think people who don’t buy SUVs want a vehicle with a trunk so they can hide the bodies of the people they kill. The bastards. All you murdering car owners make me sick. \*\* Good one Sam. I’ll talk to you later about that, ummmmm delivery. ---
**Author:** ![lucwarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e19adc/32.png) [@lucwarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lucwarm)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2003, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-jesus-drive-the-suv-debate/182212/198 "2003-06-22T15:05:14Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by enipla \* > \*\*I know this wasn’t addressed to me, but… > > ummm. Why do you care?\*\* Minivans pose less of a hazard to me and my family. Also, they are lower than SUV’s – making their headlights, bumpers, and general profile less of an annoyance to me. ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2003, 7:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-jesus-drive-the-suv-debate/182212/199 "2003-06-23T07:02:06Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by lucwarm \* > \*\*Minivans pose less of a hazard to me and my family. Also, they are lower than SUV’s – making their headlights, bumpers, and general profile less of an annoyance to me. \*\* Also less of a danger. Crash tests have shown that SUVs, because of their height, have a tendency to ride up _over_ the hoods of cars in head-on collisions, right into the passenger compartment of the car.:eek: In side collisions, they tend to penetrate _above_ the door structure of the car and literally come right in through the window. Also the stiff frame of an SUV absorbs little of the force of impact, creating a higher chance of injury for passengers in BOTH vehicles. Since there are no regulations as to how high bumpers must be, they have progressively been getting higher and higher on SUVs, mainly because it looks more “aggressive”. The resulting height mismatch for vehicles on the road makes things much more dangerous for car drivers, but doesn’t make SUV drivers any safer at all. Minivans, on the other hand, are lower to the ground and tend to have lower bumpers. They also mostly use unibody construction and therefore are better at absorbing crash impact. To the extent that some SUVs are starting to employ unibody construction, that’s a good thing, although most still don’t, and it still doesn’t address the other problems. ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2003, 7:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-jesus-drive-the-suv-debate/182212/200 "2003-06-23T07:16:19Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by enipla \* > My original statement was countering the argument that all of a sudden people need big cars. We have wanted/needed big cars for a long time. They do not manufacture big old station wagons any more. I never said people all of a sudden need big cars. But you’re getting warm. Now, why don’t they manufacture big old station wagons anymore? Here’s a hint: loophole. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-jesus-drive-the-suv-debate/182212.md?page=9)